Anyone works with a monopod

[jalvarogutierrez]

<p>Hi guys,<br>

Any of you had worked with a monopod? I am thinkins of getting one for wedding photography.</p>

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

<p>Yes, I have a mono-pod. I rarely use it for wedding photography.</p>

<p> </p>

[fotografz]

<p>Yes, I take one with me most of the time, and use it occassionaly when shooting ambient light in darker conditions.</p>

[jalvarogutierrez]

<p>When you use it guys?</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Yes: I use my monopod more than my tripod at Weddings, in the Church, for the Available Light Shots if required - I can move more quickly with it, than a tripod. <br>

I take both with me, though, to the Church and might use the tripod for a long shot, if the Tv required, is very slow, or if I cannot brace the monopod suitably. <br>

I use the tripod more often for the formals, mainly because my shooting style requires my eye away from the viewfinder, and often I use a 645 rig and often at quite slow Tv.<br>

<br>

WW </p>

 

[steve_c.5]

<p>I have a monopod that I take to every wedding, but I rarely use it. With image stabilization in the body of my camera, every lens is stabilized, so I can handhold shots at very slow shutter speeds. If you have Nikon or Canon, you can get special stabilized lenses that will reduce or eliminate your need for a monopod, but they're more costly.</p>

<p>When I do use it, it's in a church, screwed to the bottom of a 70-200 f2.8 lens, doing long shots from the back of the room in available light. A tripod is simply too confining for this work.</p>

<p>I have a Manfrotto tripod with a ball head, but never use it for weddings, only for portrait work or something where I need the camera in the same position every shot. Otherwise, it rides in the back of my car for that rare instance when I'd need it.</p>

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

<p>I use a tripod. Try enlarging a file for a 40" x 30" from a hand held shot! I've got a few framed 40" x 30" framed prints (no mat!) in my studio and you can get up real close and they are tack sharp. Unless you or your client can be convinced that isn't possible or not your art. Whatever.</p>

<p>Tried a monopod but it kept falling over.</p>

<p>Have you tried using a bean bag?</p>

<p> </p>

[jalvarogutierrez]

<p>Nope, never bill.</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>I always have one available but rarely use it these days. Probably the use of higher iso's and faster glass.</p>

[chetn]

<p>I often need my monopod during dark receptions. I only use a tripod for HDR, stitched panoramas and still life in studio, never at weddings. I would rather use a monopod in dark enviroments than on camera flash.</p>

[sherijohnson]

<p>I will be using one mainly because I appreciate the extra support since hours of shooting make the camera feel heavy after a while, but for super sharpness, I would use a tripod.</p>

[steve_c.5]

<p>So Bill, when you shoot a church wedding, do you run down the side aisles with your camera/tripod, spread the legs, and get your shot from one side, and then run to the back and shoot, and then to the other side? Unless you're shooting everything from a stationary position at the back of the church, a tripod isn't very practical. If you're shooting an outdoor wedding, it would be even worse. I shoot handheld shots all the time and have no sharpness issues. I'm not saying they're not necessary, but if you use them for everything, it could be very cumbersome.</p>

[mark_t5]

<p>i take my tripod with me, but usually it ends up in the trunk and dont see much use in the wedding. i move too much and that tripod just gets in the way.</p>

[cjogo]

<p>I have a Manfrotto Neotec ( incorporates a foot and fast pneumatic system) with a quick release / ball head system. Tripod for the churches, though .</p>

[mt4x4]

<p>I'm not a wedding photo, but I would suggest staying away from any monopod w/ a built in ballhead. I have one that I bought, which you cannot remove the ballhead, and hate it. I'm going to be replacing it soon.<br /> <br /> Honestly, I don't even see the point of having a ballhead on a monopod, its just unnecessary.</p>

[brendanryan]

<p>I bought a manfrotto one a while back and although it hasn't had much use when it was been used i've been happy with it's use-ability I suppose,mainly low light documentary.<br>

I've never used one for weddings... just think the less stuff I have on me at a wedding the better. </p>

[bob_crisp]

<p>I use one for shooting with my non IS 70-200 2.8 during the ceremony. It allows me to get some shoots I may have missed due to slower shutter speeds, but also still allows me the mobility a tripod won't. It isn't as good as a tripod for low shutter speed photos but it is better than handheld.</p>

[think27]

<p>Don't need a tri or monopod...</p>

<p>I actually use my monopod for my second flash. My assistant would hold it way up and we'd bounce or use it for a backlight or second light.</p>

[cjogo]

<p>KEITH I'm not a wedding photo, but I would suggest staying away from any monopod w/ a built in ballhead. I have one that I bought, which you cannot remove the ballhead, and hate it. I'm going to be replacing it soon.<br /> <br /> Honestly, I don't even see the point of having a ballhead on a monopod, its just unnecessary.</p>

<p><em><br /> </em><br>

<em>Our Linhoff head is removable ---and the quick release works fine .....I use it for 70-200mm low light ---- How would one angle their camera/lens quickly, without a ball head ? The foot on the Neotec actually helps stabilize ...a click of the clutch and you are at eye-level. </em></p>

[pete_s.]

<p>I use a monopod with a ball head. Read why a ball head or similar device is needed for maximum monopod stability here: http://www.outdooreyes.com/photo5.php3</p>

<p> </p>

[karina_a]

<p>We took a monopod and two trippods to our first paid job on Saturday, but in the Church I didn't have the time to use the monopod, because it is only usable for horizontals not verticals, and I don't have time to attach it to a monopod for only one orientation. I am assuming the ball-mounts can be used for vertical shots? I must look into it further, as I would have found it quite useful if it could be used for both.</p>

[William Michael]

<p><em><strong>"I am assuming the ball-mounts can be used for vertical shots?"</strong></em> <br>

Yes. <br>

Hence, I assume, the comments by C Jo and Pete above, referring to Keith's statement.<br>

However, you will find that some Photographers ditch the ball head, (I do), when using a lens like the EF70-200F2.8L or 300F2.8L and longer telephotos. These lenses have a "Tripod Mount Ring”, which fits around the body of the lens. <br>

Usually the Photographer will leave the screw which locks the collar tight, just a little looser than "thumb tight". This allows the camera and lens to be rotated 360 deg. within the collar. The added value with this is mechanism, is the lens and camera keeps its position (and centre mass) over the centre, downward, axis of the monopod.<br>

Not using a ball head is often utilized when shooting sports, for example, where telephoto and longer zoom lenses are more often used, on a monopod, and usually for the whole event or the whole day. <br>

You might investigate a “Quick Release” mounting system also, if you intend use a monopod often at Weddings, especially if you are dependent upon one camera at any particular time. <br>

Regards, I trust the Wedding Shoot, went well.<br>

WW</p>

[josh_hunt]

<p>It is not that useful to me. if the situation needs such a slow shutter speed, it usually needs a trypod.</p>

<p>Josh<br>

www.joshhuntphotos.com</p>

[rebecca_eby]

<p>I use a monopod at nearly every single wedding at both the ceremony and reception. I don't use it for wedding party/b&B formals. (Exception for outdoor and very well lit ceremonies- then I don't need it.) Can't do without it, for two reasons. </p>

<p>1) I have smaller hands and a bad wrist. So the monopod is great for saving me from two days of aching wrists after the wedding. I shoot with two cameras, so I put the camera with heavy lens combo on the tripod, and usually carry my second camera with a smaller lens.</p>

<p>2) A tripod is too bulky to carry around much, so a monopod is easily transportable, flexible for getting in akward spaces, and allows me to steady for the shot. I do not yet have a 70-200 VR (IS if you use Canon), but even still, a monopod comes in handy for the reason above. </p>

<p>My first one was cheap (from Amvona) and worked relatively fine last year. But I just bought a nice Manfrotto monopod and the quality is such a huge difference! I can't wait for weddings to start this year so I can use it! <br>

I did 30+ wedding last year, and probably used the monopod for at least 20 of them. Tripod- maybe used for five, tops.</p>